Pats D 2001-04

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kurupt. Show Kurupt's posts

    Pats D 2001-04

    Saw highlights of the D from the good ol' days and it gave me goosebumps. Wether it be jarring hits by Rodney Harrison or 4 sacks in a game by Willie McGinest. The defense used to be something I'd enjoy watching. Now I have to loook up people's names on my iPhone to see who is playing out there (Phillip Adams? who?) Even when the days of Tom Brady and the awesome offense are over, I'd rather see the second coming of a defense that strikes fear into opponents rather than a second Tom Brady. Good defense oftentimes overshadows mediocre/average offense and is, in my opinion, more interesting to watch. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    Given my druthers, I think the best formula (if there is one) is a great QB and a great defense, as opposed to a great defense, and a great RB/WR with a caretaker, or a great QB and a ton of tools on offense for him to use. 

    I too, would like to see NE revamp their defense in the next generation and focus on farming a replacement for Tom. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from gandalf433. Show gandalf433's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    Urban Legends: Four sacks* in a game by Willie McGinest? Willie averaged less than 7 sacks per season from 2001-2004. He only averaged double digits once and that was in 1995. 

    Let's rewrite history, glorify the past, and refuse to appreciate what we have today. 

    *Willie had 4.5 sacks in one playoff game in 2005. It was against the Jaguars and we won 28-3. A great day for Willie and the Pats. But Willie was not, repeat not, a sack machine. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    In Response to Re: Pats D 2001-04:
    [QUOTE]Given my druthers, I think the best formula (if there is one) is a great QB and a great defense, as opposed to a great defense, and a great RB/WR with a caretaker, or a great QB and a ton of tools on offense for him to use.  I too, would like to see NE revamp their defense in the next generation and focus on farming a replacement for Tom. 
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]


    I have espoused exactly the same formula for some years now. Deviations from that can win big, but your best bet is the elite QB and stout D.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    In Response to Re: Pats D 2001-04:
    [QUOTE]Urban Legends: Four sacks* in a game by Willie McGinest? Willie averaged less than 7 sacks per season from 2001-2004. He only averaged double digits once and that was in 1995.  Let's rewrite history, glorify the past, and refuse to appreciate what we have today.  *Willie had 4.5 sacks in one playoff game in 2005. It was against the Jaguars and we won 28-3. A great day for Willie and the Pats. But Willie was not, repeat not, a sack machine. 
    Posted by gandalf433[/QUOTE]

    Sorry chump. I appreciate Super Bowl wins more than one and outs.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    A great D will certainly fire up the crowd.

    The San Fran crowd made noise last night.  Kind of embarrassing when cheese-eating californians make patriot fans look weak.

    Must be the defense.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    In Response to Pats D 2001-04:
    [QUOTE]Saw highlights of the D from the good ol' days and it gave me goosebumps. Wether it be jarring hits by Rodney Harrison or 4 sacks in a game by Willie McGinest. The defense used to be something I'd enjoy watching. Now I have to loook up people's names on my iPhone to see who is playing out there (Phillip Adams? who?) Even when the days of Tom Brady and the awesome offense are over, I'd rather see the second coming of a defense that strikes fear into opponents rather than a second Tom Brady. Good defense oftentimes overshadows mediocre/average offense and is, in my opinion, more interesting to watch. 
    Posted by Kurupt[/QUOTE]

    iPhones are for women.. get a real mans phone.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    I'm in the same boat. Brady's come around once in a lifetime. Chances are we won't have another Brady or even a Young for a long time once Brady retires. As such you might be able to find a good to great QB but I'd rather have the dominant D again. I'm hoping this draft they don't trade any of their picks and just get the best 6 front 7 players they can and hope half become starters. I know that won't happen but it would be nice to see them invest heavily on young talent on the D this year and stop trying to piece meal a D from left over scraps and players on their last tank of gas
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from gandalf433. Show gandalf433's posts

    Re: Pats D 2001-04

    In Response to Re: Pats D 2001-04:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Pats D 2001-04 : Sorry chump. I appreciate Super Bowl wins more than one and outs.
    Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]
    Hey Babe, I appreciate SB wins too. That doesn't mean we fabricate stats from the past. No one was singing the praises of the Pats the year they first won the SB, and even after they won, most declared it a fluke and blip on the screen for the St. Louis Dynasty.  My point is you really don't know what you have until they play the game. We may have a core on defense that carries us through another three SB's, you never know. 

    I enjoyed the ride then and I am enjoying the ride now just as much. 
     

Share